Live data from Hacker News

H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

mercurynews.com

171–180 of 235 posts

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#171
post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You said there is no recourse after talking about a situation in which no one has recourse against the employer, i.e. if you get fired out of spite for looking for a new job. There is as you know recourse if you're fired illegally, as the American people have been so generous as to grant foreigners the right to sue Americans employers in such cases.

Yes, but how do you sue if you have to leave the country on a short notice?

By hiring a lawyer to represent you.

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#172
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been here for 17+ years, earn $650k/yr and I'm still in the same boat. I'm at the mercy of the govt. if I want to change jobs. Moreover, I need to restart the labor certification process and reapply for my green card though I get to keep the same priority date. There's no end in sight i.e. I cannot predict when I'll get my green card due to the per-country cap and backlog. Worse, I cannot quit and take time off…

Huh, wouldn't putting 1 million dollar investment get you EB5 green card in very short time?

[deleted]

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#173

>There's absolutely no recourse. Why would a person expect to have recourse against a government which exists for the sole purpose of furthering the interests of a group of people to which that person does not belong?

It is the American employer that has no recourse to protest the government restriction on their business!

To the limited degree that that's true, that's too bad for the American employer. The American citizen wants the government to put those restrictions on the American employer, and he is the one the government exists to serve, at least ostensibly.

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#174

Signed up just to say this. I don't see the controversy in not counting QA analyst as a specialty position. Just look up what countries like Canada, UK, France consider specialty positions and understand that this isn't a controversy. In fact, I was shocked that QA has been an H1B position in the United States. This is also why there are such massive backlogs for EB-3 for India, despite them getting circa 18% of the…

The truth might be worse than you think. Not only has QA been a popular H1B approved requisition, but so are positions that are simply listed as “Analyst” and “Business Analyst” and so on, as well as the many many variations on “Analyst” (QA or other). It might compete with “Developer” as the most common H1B position.

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#175
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been here for 17+ years, earn $650k/yr and I'm still in the same boat. I'm at the mercy of the govt. if I want to change jobs. Moreover, I need to restart the labor certification process and reapply for my green card though I get to keep the same priority date. There's no end in sight i.e. I cannot predict when I'll get my green card due to the per-country cap and backlog. Worse, I cannot quit and take time off…

Why not get an investor visa? It's easily convertible to green card according to several people I know who did it. You only need $500K or so for the whole thing. And investment money were returned even with some profit.

Too risky to put so much of my hard-earned money into it. I wouldn't be able to sleep at night.

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is the American employer that has no recourse to protest the government restriction on their business!

To the limited degree that that's true, that's too bad for the American employer. The American citizen wants the government to put those restrictions on the American employer, and he is the one the government exists to serve, at least ostensibly.

The American employer is an American citizen. The situation where a majority extorts a minority is normally called oppression.

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#177
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$120k qualifies for low income benefits in San Francisco, so yeah that's not going to matter.

Low income for a family of four IIRC, not for a single person.

Yeah, all you need to do is look up rent and taxes for that to be obvious. After taxes an online calculator is telling me you take home $82k. A single bedroom can be had for roughly $2k with roommates, $3k (comfortably) for a studio or one bed. Oh poor you with a disposable income of... over $40k/year

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To the limited degree that that's true, that's too bad for the American employer. The American citizen wants the government to put those restrictions on the American employer, and he is the one the government exists to serve, at least ostensibly.

The American employer is an American citizen. The situation where a majority extorts a minority is normally called oppression.

Yes, and one whose bags of money has given him a vastly disproportionate say over the actions of the government. You can call it extortion if you want, I guess. Provided it's in the interests of the American citizen to restrict access to the US labor market, I don't see why they should care what you call it. If you think it's not in their interest, I'd be interested to hear your argument. On the other hand, if you want them to forgo their own interests for some of your ideals, maybe start by pointing out someone that has for those ideals forgone their own interests for the benefit of the American citizen. Good luck finding some.

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you must not be here on a non-immigrant Visa. You need a dual-intent compatible visa such as H1B.

This is incorrect: you don't need to be in the US at all to apply for any immigrant visa. I believe the Indian body shops perpetuate the fictitious idea that, similarly to naturalization, there is also a required time to be present in the country before being eligible for a GC. While I can see how it fits into their business model, it could not be further from the reality. Not only there is no required time to be in…

Yes, that's true. But what I meant was that if you're in the US, you need to have a dual-intent visa.

Re: H-1B: Federal judge backs government’s narrower view of ‘specialty occupation’

#180
post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so? Body shop scammers who spam the H-1 system would no longer have an advantage.

Body shops would be able to bring in many more workers, and supress wages further. The dearth of middle income jobs in the USA is in part caused by these body shops flooding the domestic market with questionable talent, driving down wages and living standards severely.

>> The dearth of middle income jobs...

References/data for that?

Post reply on HN